Author Index
by Authors: M

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 126 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2010-2011.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 126 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2010-2011.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures (for both print and electronic materials), and service activities of the 125 Association of Research Libraries member libraries in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures (for both print and electronic materials), and service activities of the 125 Association of Research Libraries member libraries in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 125 ARL member libraries during FY2013–2014. Data for 10,168 professional staff members were reported this year for the 115 ARL university libraries, including their law and medical libraries (907 staff members reported by 72 medical libraries and 761 staff members reported by 77 law libraries). For the 10 nonuniversity ARL members, data were reported for 3,791 professional staff members. Beginning, median, and average salaries by race, sex, years of experience, geographic region, and professional position for research, university, law, and medical libraries are covered.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 125 ARL member libraries during FY2013–2014. Data for 10,168 professional staff members were reported this year for the 115 ARL university libraries, including their law and medical libraries (907 staff members reported by 72 medical libraries and 761 staff members reported by 77 law libraries). For the 10 nonuniversity ARL members, data were reported for 3,791 professional staff members. Beginning, median, and average salaries by race, sex, years of experience, geographic region, and professional position for research, university, law, and medical libraries are covered.

For the purposes of this survey, an IR was simply defined as a permanent, institution-wide repository of diverse locally produced digital works (e.g., article preprints and postprints, data sets, electronic theses and dissertations, learning objects, and technical reports) that is available for public use and supports metadata harvesting. If an institution shares an IR with other institutions, it was within the scope of this survey. Not included in this definition were scholars’ personal Web sites; academic department, school, or other unit digital archives that are primarily intended to store digital materials created by members of that unit; or disciplinary archives that include digital materials about one or multiple subjects that have been created by authors from many different institutions (e.g., arXiv.org).

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in January 2006. Eighty-seven libraries (71%) responded to the survey. Of those, 37 (43%) have an operational IR, 31 (35%) are planning for one by 2007 at the latest, and 19 (22%) have no immediate plans to develop an IR. The survey found that most IRs had been established in the last two years (or had just been established). By far, the library was likely to have been the most active institutional advocate of the IR. It was also likely to have been the primary unit leading and supporting the IR effort, sometimes in partnership with the institutional information technology unit. The main reasons for establishing an IR were to increase the global visibility of, preserve, provide free access to, and collect and organize the institution’s scholarship.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of IR home pages, IR usage statistics, deposit policies, metadata policies, preservation policies, and IR proposals

For the purposes of this survey, an IR was simply defined as a permanent, institution-wide repository of diverse locally produced digital works (e.g., article preprints and postprints, data sets, electronic theses and dissertations, learning objects, and technical reports) that is available for public use and supports metadata harvesting. If an institution shares an IR with other institutions, it was within the scope of this survey. Not included in this definition were scholars’ personal Web sites; academic department, school, or other unit digital archives that are primarily intended to store digital materials created by members of that unit; or disciplinary archives that include digital materials about one or multiple subjects that have been created by authors from many different institutions (e.g., arXiv.org).

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in January 2006. Eighty-seven libraries (71%) responded to the survey. Of those, 37 (43%) have an operational IR, 31 (35%) are planning for one by 2007 at the latest, and 19 (22%) have no immediate plans to develop an IR. The survey found that most IRs had been established in the last two years (or had just been established). By far, the library was likely to have been the most active institutional advocate of the IR. It was also likely to have been the primary unit leading and supporting the IR effort, sometimes in partnership with the institutional information technology unit. The main reasons for establishing an IR were to increase the global visibility of, preserve, provide free access to, and collect and organize the institution’s scholarship.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of IR home pages, IR usage statistics, deposit policies, metadata policies, preservation policies, and IR proposals

ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2012–2013presents data that describes collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 73 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2012–2013presents data that describes collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 73 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2012–2013 presents data that describes collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 60 health sciences libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2012–2013 presents data that describes collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 60 health sciences libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada in fiscal year 2012–2013.

This SPEC Kit explores the scope of accreditation standards,the data provided by research libraries to meet the requirements of accrediting bodies, and which library staff participate in preparing reports and site visits. The survey results may help libraries identify and understand what standards exist, and how their contributions lead to successful accreditation and reaccreditation for their parent institutions. Additionally, this survey sought to identify how deeply ARL libraries are involved in the accreditation process at the institutional level. As libraries strive to establish their impact and value in higher education, this measure is one way to gauge how institutional leaders perceive their libraries’ contributions.

This SPEC Kit includes examples of programmatic and regional accrediting agency reports from respondents and descriptions of the accreditation process.

This SPEC Kit explores the scope of accreditation standards,the data provided by research libraries to meet the requirements of accrediting bodies, and which library staff participate in preparing reports and site visits. The survey results may help libraries identify and understand what standards exist, and how their contributions lead to successful accreditation and reaccreditation for their parent institutions. Additionally, this survey sought to identify how deeply ARL libraries are involved in the accreditation process at the institutional level. As libraries strive to establish their impact and value in higher education, this measure is one way to gauge how institutional leaders perceive their libraries’ contributions.

This SPEC Kit includes examples of programmatic and regional accrediting agency reports from respondents and descriptions of the accreditation process.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 125 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2011-2012.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 125 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2011-2012.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 125 ARL member libraries during 2012–2013. Data are reported for 10,072 professional staff in the 115 university ARL libraries and for 3,823 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 125 ARL member libraries during 2012–2013. Data are reported for 10,072 professional staff in the 115 university ARL libraries and for 3,823 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 126 ARL member libraries during 2011-2012. Data are reported for 9,910 professional staff in the 115 university libraries and for 4,046 professional staff in the 11 non-university libraries.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 126 ARL member libraries during 2011-2012. Data are reported for 9,910 professional staff in the 115 university libraries and for 4,046 professional staff in the 11 non-university libraries.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 125 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2009–2010.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 125 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2009–2010.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 126 ARL member libraries during 2010–2011. Data are reported for 10,037 professional staff in the 115 university ARL libraries and for 3,709 professional staff in the 11 non-university ARL libraries.

This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 126 ARL member libraries during 2010–2011. Data are reported for 10,037 professional staff in the 115 university ARL libraries and for 3,709 professional staff in the 11 non-university ARL libraries.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 124 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2008–2009.

This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 124 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2008–2009.

This SPEC Kit explores the strategies that ARL member institutions use to protect evolving research collections and the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. The survey asked ARL libraries about their digital content, their strategies for preserving that content, and the staff, time, and funding they currently devote to digital preservation. It also asked each responding library to compare its digital preservation activities of three years ago to current activities and project three years into the future. In addition, to better understand the roles of research libraries in the emergent field of digital curation, the survey sought to identify issues that are and are not being addressed through current practices and policies.

This survey revealed, as the digital preservation field is maturing, that most ARL libraries are rising to the challenge of establishing policies, workflows, and infrastructures to systematically preserve their rapidly expanding bodies of digital content. The survey also revealed that most ARL libraries are actively engaging in in-house digital preservation rather than outsourcing it to external parties, thus maintaining their control and ownership over the digital content that they curate.

This SPEC Kit explores the strategies that ARL member institutions use to protect evolving research collections and the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. The survey asked ARL libraries about their digital content, their strategies for preserving that content, and the staff, time, and funding they currently devote to digital preservation. It also asked each responding library to compare its digital preservation activities of three years ago to current activities and project three years into the future. In addition, to better understand the roles of research libraries in the emergent field of digital curation, the survey sought to identify issues that are and are not being addressed through current practices and policies.

This survey revealed, as the digital preservation field is maturing, that most ARL libraries are rising to the challenge of establishing policies, workflows, and infrastructures to systematically preserve their rapidly expanding bodies of digital content. The survey also revealed that most ARL libraries are actively engaging in in-house digital preservation rather than outsourcing it to external parties, thus maintaining their control and ownership over the digital content that they curate.

This SPEC Kit explores what promotional activities and objectives research libraries are pursuing, who organizes them, how are they evaluated, and what challenges they face.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Eighty-seven libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 71%. All of the responding libraries indicated that they currently engage in some form of promotional activities. Sixty-four percent of the responding libraries indicated that they have at least one library staff member with “promotion” as part of his/her position description. These positions typically report to library administration and are charged with strategic planning, media relations, and guiding the communications vision. However, they are usually not involved in the day-to-day promotional activities of their libraries.

The survey responses indicated that day-to-day promotional activities are handled by a wide array of committees, task forces, and ad hoc groups. These teams tend to be interdepartmental and focus on hosting events, developing print and Web materials, fundraising, and other outreach-related duties. Similarly, respondents indicated that individual departments and branch libraries typically produce their own material to increase awareness and explain particular services.

The survey results also show which skills these staff need; how they decide which promotional activities to pursue; what their objectives are; how the activities are funded; and more. Descriptions of a wide variety of activities are included, as well.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of marketing plans, job descriptions, and promotional materials.

This SPEC Kit explores what promotional activities and objectives research libraries are pursuing, who organizes them, how are they evaluated, and what challenges they face.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Eighty-seven libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 71%. All of the responding libraries indicated that they currently engage in some form of promotional activities. Sixty-four percent of the responding libraries indicated that they have at least one library staff member with “promotion” as part of his/her position description. These positions typically report to library administration and are charged with strategic planning, media relations, and guiding the communications vision. However, they are usually not involved in the day-to-day promotional activities of their libraries.

The survey responses indicated that day-to-day promotional activities are handled by a wide array of committees, task forces, and ad hoc groups. These teams tend to be interdepartmental and focus on hosting events, developing print and Web materials, fundraising, and other outreach-related duties. Similarly, respondents indicated that individual departments and branch libraries typically produce their own material to increase awareness and explain particular services.

The survey results also show which skills these staff need; how they decide which promotional activities to pursue; what their objectives are; how the activities are funded; and more. Descriptions of a wide variety of activities are included, as well.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of marketing plans, job descriptions, and promotional materials.

This SPEC Kit investigates the progress made in ARL member organizations to establish or enhance socialization programs and activities (such as orientation programs, mentoring, residency appointments, and staff development sessions directed at organizational acculturation) for all newly hired, paid employees. It explores the availability and types of programs, activities, and resources currently offered in ARL institutions; staff involved in designing and coordinating socialization programs and activities; goals and budget for socialization programs; length of participation in programs and activities; evaluation and assessment of programs; and benefits of socialization programs, activities and resources.

The survey results clearly demonstrate that socialization activities are widespread and growing in research libraries and archives. The volume of response and detailed sample documents provided are indicative of the prevalence of existing activities and institutional commitment to these programs. There is a perception of the critical importance and value of these activities to the enhancement of organizational success. The plethora of comments on the benefits of socialization programs indicates that ARL members highly value these efforts.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes orientation, mentoring, and peer socialization programs, and provides examples of orientation websites, orientation/socialization checklists, program evaluation methods, and staff development resources.

This SPEC Kit investigates the progress made in ARL member organizations to establish or enhance socialization programs and activities (such as orientation programs, mentoring, residency appointments, and staff development sessions directed at organizational acculturation) for all newly hired, paid employees. It explores the availability and types of programs, activities, and resources currently offered in ARL institutions; staff involved in designing and coordinating socialization programs and activities; goals and budget for socialization programs; length of participation in programs and activities; evaluation and assessment of programs; and benefits of socialization programs, activities and resources.

The survey results clearly demonstrate that socialization activities are widespread and growing in research libraries and archives. The volume of response and detailed sample documents provided are indicative of the prevalence of existing activities and institutional commitment to these programs. There is a perception of the critical importance and value of these activities to the enhancement of organizational success. The plethora of comments on the benefits of socialization programs indicates that ARL members highly value these efforts.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes orientation, mentoring, and peer socialization programs, and provides examples of orientation websites, orientation/socialization checklists, program evaluation methods, and staff development resources.

This SPEC Kit investigates two broad categories of benefit plans currently offered to professional library staff at ARL member libraries: leave time and support for professional development activities. Topics include benefits eligibility; holiday and intersession leave; plan designs and accrual rates for paid time off (PTO), vacation, and sick leave; and professional development leaves such as dedicated research time and sabbaticals. Other professional development topics include financial support and relief from duties for conference attendance; funding for professional association memberships; and financial and other support for college credit course work, internships, and certifications.

By the August deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated there is considerable variation in the leave programs at ARL member libraries. Relatively few use a Paid Time Off leave program or offer intersession leave. While there is a wide variation in leave balance and cash out policies, the total paid time off for librarians is considerable.

There is also considerable support for research and professional development activities, though programs for supporting professional development show wide variation in design and procedures. While relatively few libraries provide a regularly scheduled percentage of assignment time off, most offer some options for time away for research and professional development activities.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of policies on travel support, professional development leave and funding, sabbaticals, education, and tuition assistance and an example of an individual development award program.

This SPEC Kit investigates two broad categories of benefit plans currently offered to professional library staff at ARL member libraries: leave time and support for professional development activities. Topics include benefits eligibility; holiday and intersession leave; plan designs and accrual rates for paid time off (PTO), vacation, and sick leave; and professional development leaves such as dedicated research time and sabbaticals. Other professional development topics include financial support and relief from duties for conference attendance; funding for professional association memberships; and financial and other support for college credit course work, internships, and certifications.

By the August deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated there is considerable variation in the leave programs at ARL member libraries. Relatively few use a Paid Time Off leave program or offer intersession leave. While there is a wide variation in leave balance and cash out policies, the total paid time off for librarians is considerable.

There is also considerable support for research and professional development activities, though programs for supporting professional development show wide variation in design and procedures. While relatively few libraries provide a regularly scheduled percentage of assignment time off, most offer some options for time away for research and professional development activities.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of policies on travel support, professional development leave and funding, sabbaticals, education, and tuition assistance and an example of an individual development award program.

This SPEC Kit explores the variety of resources and services being delivered to or envisioned for graduate students and faculty.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2008. Sixty-five libraries (six Canadian and 59 American) completed the survey by the deadline of April 28 for a 53% response rate. Of these respondents, 48 institutions (74%) indicated that they provide or plan to provide services or spaces specifically designed for the designated populations. Most are providing or designing spaces/services to meet the needs of both groups, with only seven reporting services/spaces exclusively for graduate students and two locations committed to providing service/space exclusively to faculty. Thirteen of 47 respondents (28%) target discipline-specific graduate students; eight (17%) of these also target a specific group of faculty. In most cases, the targeted groups tend to be in humanities or social sciences.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of descriptions of services, descriptions of spaces, examples of marketing and outreach efforts, and partnership agreements.

This SPEC Kit explores the variety of resources and services being delivered to or envisioned for graduate students and faculty.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2008. Sixty-five libraries (six Canadian and 59 American) completed the survey by the deadline of April 28 for a 53% response rate. Of these respondents, 48 institutions (74%) indicated that they provide or plan to provide services or spaces specifically designed for the designated populations. Most are providing or designing spaces/services to meet the needs of both groups, with only seven reporting services/spaces exclusively for graduate students and two locations committed to providing service/space exclusively to faculty. Thirteen of 47 respondents (28%) target discipline-specific graduate students; eight (17%) of these also target a specific group of faculty. In most cases, the targeted groups tend to be in humanities or social sciences.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of descriptions of services, descriptions of spaces, examples of marketing and outreach efforts, and partnership agreements.

This SPEC Kit explores what progress has been made in ARL member libraries to recruit and retain a diverse workforce; the strategies they use to increase the number of ethnically/culturally diverse librarians in the profession and in their libraries; the elements of programs that successfully support an inclusive workplace; the people, groups, and/or committees responsible for overseeing the programs; and how libraries are assessing the effectiveness and success of such programs.

The survey results indicate there has been a significant increase in the number of groups and committees formed to address diversity or inclusive workplace goals in the past ten years. Human resource officers share the responsibility of leading these committees and implementing diversity plans with diversity officers, staff development officers, multicultural librarians, and other library staff. Approximately half of the responding libraries have ongoing presentations and/or workshops on issues relevant to promoting an inclusive workplace. Others have had at least one-time presentations or plan to develop programs.

Recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce continues to be a challenge for libraries. It is evident that research libraries are committed to actively recruit librarians from underrepresented ethnic/racial groups and have employed a variety of strategies to increase the diversity of applicant pools. Measures to evaluate the success of their efforts to recruit and retain an ethnically/culturally diverse workforce are still in development, though.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of diversity statements, diversity plans, and descriptions of diversity and recruitment programs.

This SPEC Kit explores what progress has been made in ARL member libraries to recruit and retain a diverse workforce; the strategies they use to increase the number of ethnically/culturally diverse librarians in the profession and in their libraries; the elements of programs that successfully support an inclusive workplace; the people, groups, and/or committees responsible for overseeing the programs; and how libraries are assessing the effectiveness and success of such programs.

The survey results indicate there has been a significant increase in the number of groups and committees formed to address diversity or inclusive workplace goals in the past ten years. Human resource officers share the responsibility of leading these committees and implementing diversity plans with diversity officers, staff development officers, multicultural librarians, and other library staff. Approximately half of the responding libraries have ongoing presentations and/or workshops on issues relevant to promoting an inclusive workplace. Others have had at least one-time presentations or plan to develop programs.

Recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce continues to be a challenge for libraries. It is evident that research libraries are committed to actively recruit librarians from underrepresented ethnic/racial groups and have employed a variety of strategies to increase the diversity of applicant pools. Measures to evaluate the success of their efforts to recruit and retain an ethnically/culturally diverse workforce are still in development, though.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of diversity statements, diversity plans, and descriptions of diversity and recruitment programs.

This SPEC Kit investigates the purposes of ARL member libraries’ digitization efforts, the organizational structures these libraries use to manage digital initiatives, whether and how staff have been reassigned to support digitization activities, where funding to sustain digital activities originated and how that funding is allocated, how priorities are determined, whether libraries are outsourcing any digitization work, and how the success of libraries’ digital activities has been assessed.

The survey, which focussed on the digitization of existing library materials, rather than the creation of born-digital objects, was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2006. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which all but two (97%) reported having engaged in digitization activities. Only one respondent reported having begun digitization activities prior to 1992; five other pioneers followed in 1992. From 1994 through 1998 there was a steady increase in the number of libraries beginning digital initiatives; 30 joined the pioneers at the rate of three to six a year. There was a spike of activity at the turn of the millennium that reached a high in 2000, when nine libraries began digital projects. Subsequently, new start-ups have slowed, with only an additional one to five libraries beginning digitization activities each year.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of organization charts, mission statements, job descriptions, policies and procedures, and selection criteria.

This SPEC Kit investigates the purposes of ARL member libraries’ digitization efforts, the organizational structures these libraries use to manage digital initiatives, whether and how staff have been reassigned to support digitization activities, where funding to sustain digital activities originated and how that funding is allocated, how priorities are determined, whether libraries are outsourcing any digitization work, and how the success of libraries’ digital activities has been assessed.

The survey, which focussed on the digitization of existing library materials, rather than the creation of born-digital objects, was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2006. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which all but two (97%) reported having engaged in digitization activities. Only one respondent reported having begun digitization activities prior to 1992; five other pioneers followed in 1992. From 1994 through 1998 there was a steady increase in the number of libraries beginning digital initiatives; 30 joined the pioneers at the rate of three to six a year. There was a spike of activity at the turn of the millennium that reached a high in 2000, when nine libraries began digital projects. Subsequently, new start-ups have slowed, with only an additional one to five libraries beginning digitization activities each year.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of organization charts, mission statements, job descriptions, policies and procedures, and selection criteria.

This SPEC Kit investigates how metadata is implemented in ARL member libraries: which staff are creating metadata and for what kinds of digital objects, what schemas and tools they use to create and manage metadata, what skills metadata staff need and how they acquire them, and the organizational changes and challenges that metadata has brought to libraries.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2007. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which 67 (99%) reported creating metadata for digital objects at their institutions. The primary factor driving the creation of metadata is the responding libraries’ involvement in digitization projects (66 of 67 responses or 99%). Metadata also plays an important role in institutional repositories (54%). Other initiatives and projects that have promoted the use of metadata are: Web content management, datasets, subject-based and educational repositories, metadata registries, digital media labs, EAD-finding aids, and online journal publishing. Metadata is being created to describe and provide access to a wide variety of digital resources, including images, text, collections, audio, maps, video, datasets, EAD finding aids, theses, and Web pages.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of mission statements, organization charts, job descriptions, and policies.

This SPEC Kit investigates how metadata is implemented in ARL member libraries: which staff are creating metadata and for what kinds of digital objects, what schemas and tools they use to create and manage metadata, what skills metadata staff need and how they acquire them, and the organizational changes and challenges that metadata has brought to libraries.

The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2007. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which 67 (99%) reported creating metadata for digital objects at their institutions. The primary factor driving the creation of metadata is the responding libraries’ involvement in digitization projects (66 of 67 responses or 99%). Metadata also plays an important role in institutional repositories (54%). Other initiatives and projects that have promoted the use of metadata are: Web content management, datasets, subject-based and educational repositories, metadata registries, digital media labs, EAD-finding aids, and online journal publishing. Metadata is being created to describe and provide access to a wide variety of digital resources, including images, text, collections, audio, maps, video, datasets, EAD finding aids, theses, and Web pages.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of mission statements, organization charts, job descriptions, and policies.